[LRFlex] R3-R4s reliablilty, service issues and sources for help?

Hi Kent, do you mind if I ask you about the R3 you mentioned? I  was
wondering where you like to send it for service and if you think they could
work on an R4s. I have an R4s that appears to be in near mint condition, I
got it from a place that offered a six month warranty on it and stated it
had been serviced, is in super operating condition and no problems. It
really is in good shape, even the rubber seal around the film canister
see-thru window is like new, so I believe that is is as they represented...
it seems really strong and reliable but I confess I am a little leery of it
every time I use it, I guess I am expecting it to just go SPROING one day
and parts shooting out from it or something. Also I am a bit gun-shy of
cameras that seem reliable and then one day, let you down at the worst
possible moment with absolutely NO warning, which is why I have given up
Russian and Eastern Bloc cameras, despite their amazing and virtually free
Carl Zeiss lenses....

 I needed a body to use with a battered but working great, 35mm f/2
Summicron 3-cam. But I have heard these Minolta-inspired Leicas are
unreliable etc. on the one hand...and from others, that if you get a good
one like the one I have, no worries, that it will be reliable. I would just
like to have on hand the name of some good, and hopefully not too expensive,
service groups for future reference if necessary, or should I not be
worried? I have heard they are more dependable than the R3 or even the
original R4s. On the other hand if you have been using the same camera since
1978 it is certainly reasonable to send it for a service at this point! I
don't shoot that many rolls of film, not like a pro at this point, maybe a
few a month during the year and more on vacations (not that I ever get
one....)

I don't want to bore everyone or open up a 'can of worms' as we say, meaning
a tired subject that has probably been flayed to death in earlier postings,
so if there is a discussion of this in some archive feel free to point me to
it, I understand.

I don't know if anyone in the group dabbles in camera repair as I do, at
least I do on a limited basis..I always seek the opinion of  a real Guru of
that field, an old guy named Ed Romney here in the US, a lifetime of
experience, publishes still in semi-retirement, dozens if not hundreds of
books and courses on camera repair, etc. I finally found some comments of
his on these Minolta inspired R's and he is not too keen on them, in terms
of reliability. I had hoped to find that this was just hysteria about this
series, but apparently there have been problems. On the other hand, I have
read elsewhere that most,  if not all of these problems surfaced in the R3 /
electronic; were worked out by the R4s era... with the P or Model 2 being
even better?

Mine is not the P, just the plain R4s.  Interestingly it has manual spot,
auto exposure spot, and auto exposure averaging metering... I saw one
on-line manual that seemed to state this model only had manual spot and auto
averaging, is mine an unusual model or an early unmarked P or Model 2 ?
There is no engraving on the hot shoe.  I recognize that many in this group
have used them also over the years and welcome your comments.

If I could, which would be the first of the more reliable, later model R
bodies, the 5 or 6? Anything later or current is just priced out of
possiblity, I'm thinking.  Or should I just calm down and trust my R4s? It
sure feels solid and like it will work forever, not like a camera that could
go out at any second. Frankly I have not read any specifics of what does go
out on these and under what circumstances. Sometimes it helps to know
this... for example the Sov Bloc Pentacon 6x6cm cameras have a notoriously
weak wind, but if you get a good one and are careful to wind smoothly and
gently, manually return the wind lever to its resting position, rather than
just letting it slap back as on a Nikon etc. it will run forever, if not,
plan a trip soon to the repair shop (inconvenient for those not residing in
Prague....)

It should cheer everyone up here that Romney absolutely raves about the R
lenses and thinks if Leica had had any sense, even back then, they would
have made their lenses in an adaptall-type mount , e/g. Tamron's strategy,
to be used on - dare I say it- Nikon, Canon  or other bodies so that pro's,
who universally recognize the superiority of Leica glass and would use them
if they could, and also have a reliable and relatively affordable camera to
use them on, maybe on the bodies they already own. Of course Leica would
have sold many less expensive (unreliable, reputation-damaging ) cameras,
and a ton more expensive (reliable, reputation-increasing)  lenses.

Thanks and I would sure appreciate any insight and tips from the group...

------
Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at:
    www.horizon.bc.ca/~dnr/lrflex.htm
Archives are at:
    www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/

Other related posts: